AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

IN THE MATTER OF: 

DOCKET NUMBER:  97-01803 

COUNSEL:  NONE 

HEARING DESIRED:  NO 

APPLICANT REOUESTS THAT: 

His request for a waiver of High Year of Tenure  (HYT) be approved 
and his subsequent reenlistment to 1 August 2000 remain valid. 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

He had been invited and did apply for High Year of Tenure  (HYT) 
waiver, which he states was approved.  He reenlisted to 1 August 
had  his  reenlistment  processed  and  approved  and 
2 0 0 0 ,  
subsequently  had  everything  denied. 
He  states  he  has  the 
ability, desire and time to remain very active in the U. S. Air 
Force Reserve. 

Applicant's submission is attached at Exhibit A. 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

The relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from 
the  applicant's military  records, are  contained  in  the  letter 
prepared  by  the  appropriate office  of  the Air  Force  Office  of 
Primary Responsibility  (OPR) .  Accordingly, there is no need  to 
recite these facts in this Record of Proceedings. 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

The  Director  of  Personnel  Program  Management,  HQ  ARPC/DPAD, 
states that  their office received two letters in behalf  of  the 
applicant recommending approval of his request for a HYT waiver. 
One  letter,  dated  18  November  1996  was  from 
Chief, 
Personnel Security of  USSTATCOM/J2431.  The other letter, dated 
19 November  1996  was  from  the  Director, Reserve  Affairs  of  HQ 
AIA/RE. 
At  the  time  of  receipt  of  these  two  letters  the 
applicant was erroneously given an adjusted HYT date of  1 August 
2000. 

The  Commander,  Air  Force  Reserve  Command,  has  established 
criteria for granting HYT waivers based on a serious degradation 
to the mission if the member is not allowed to stay on duty.  The 
justification  in  this  case  does  not  meet  that  criteria.  The 
applicant's HYT date was  initially adjusted based  solely on the 
fact  that  a  request  was  submitted,  not  on  the  merits  of  the 
request.  During a  subsequent  review, it was determined  that  a 
waiver should not be granted and the applicant was  so notified. 
They recommend the applicant's request be disapproved. 

A copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

Applicant  states,  in  summary,  that  as  a  matter  of  current 
practicality, concomitant Air Force media coverage at all levels, 
continues  to  enumerate  the  triturative  effects  of  force  wide 
downsizing, with involuntary departures, lowered morale and l o s s  
of experienced management as what is collectively contributing to 
the  degradation  of  the  mission  so  mentioned. 
The  need  for 
increasing  reliance  upon  experienced  and  available  Air  Force 
Reserve personnel  is, in fact, articulated by  the Commander Air 
Force Reserve himself, among others.  Applicant  states that his 
waiver  application  process,  as  provided  for  by  AFI  36-2612, 
Chapter  9, was  followed  by  all  parties  in  timely  and  proper 
order, and  in full knowledge and consideration of the merits of 
the request by himself, his supervisor, commander, MAJCOM and, it 
appears at the time, by ARPC themselves. 

A copy of the applicant's response is attached at Exhibit E. 

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 

The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing 

1. 
law or regulations. 

2 .   The application was timely filed. 
3.  Insufficient  relevant  evidence  has  been  presented  to 
demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.  After 
a  thorough  review  of  the  evidence  of  record  and  applicant's 
submission, we are not persuaded that his request for a waiver of 
High Year Tenure  (HYT) should be approved and his reenlistment to 
1  August  2000  remain  valid.  His  contentions are  duly  noted; 
however, we  do not  find these assertions, in and by  themselves, 
sufficiently persuasive to override the rationale provided by the 
Air  Force.  We  therefore  agree with  the  recommendations of  the 
Air Force and adopt the rationale expressed as the basis for our 

2 

decision that the applicant has failed to sustain his burden that 
he has suffered either an error or an injustice.  Therefore, we 
find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought. 

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: 

The  applicant  be  notified  that  the  evidence  presented  did  not 
demonstrate  the  existence  of  probable  material  error  or 
injustice;  that  the  application  was  denied  without  a  personal 
appearance; and  that  the  application will  only be  reconsidered 
upon  the  submission  of  newly  discovered  relevant  evidence  not 
considered with this application. 

The following members of the Board considered this application in 
Executive Session on 24 March  1998,  under the provisions of AFI 
36-2603. 

Mr. Charles E. Bennett, Panel Chair 
Mr. Allen Beckett, Member 
Mr. Patrick R. Wheeler, Member 

The following 

Exhibit A. 
Exhibit B. 
Exhibit C .  
Exhibit D. 
Exhibit E. 

documentary evidence was considered: 
DD Form 149, dated 13 Jun 97,  w/atchs. 
Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 
Letter, HQ ARPC/DPAD, dated 5 Aug  97. 
Letter, AFBCMR, dated 25 Aug 97. 
Applicant's Letter, daLed 29  Aug 97. 

,CHARLES E. BENNETT 
Panel Chair 

3 

DEPARTMENT  OF  THE  AIR  FORCE 

HEADQUARTERS  AIR  RESERVE  PERSONNEL  CENTER 

MEMORANDUM FOR AFBCMR 

1535 Command Dr EE Wing 3rd Floor 
Andrews AFB MD 2033 1-7002 

FROM:  HQ ARPUDPAD 

6760 E Irvington PI # 1700 
Denver CO 80280- 1700 

1 

1.  The requested correction cannot be accomplished administratively at this headquartcrs. 

2.  The applicant requests that his previously approved waiver of High Year of Tenure (HYT) and 

subscquent reenlistment to 01 August 2000 remain valid and not denied. 

3.  The following is an analysis of the case: 

a.  The applicant was sent a letter thirteen months prior to his HYT advising him of his options, 

which included a transfer to the Retired Reserve, be discharged from his Rescrvc assignment, or apply 
for a one-time HYT waiver.  The applicant chose to submit a HYT waiver. 

b.  Our ofice received two letters in behalf of the applic 

for a HYT waiver.  One letter, dated 18 Nov 96 was from  -- 
Security of USSTATCOM/J243 1.  The other letter, dated 19 N O ~  96 was from 

roval of  his request 
hief.  Personnel 

Director, Reserve Affairs of HQ AINRE.  At the time of receipt of these two letters the 

applicant was erroneously given an adjusted HYT date of 01 Aug 2000. 

4.  Discussion: 

a.  The Commander, Air Force Reserve Command, has established criteria for granting HYT 

waivers based on a serious degradation to the mission if the member is not allowed to stay on duty.  The 
justification in this case does not meet that criteria.  The member's HYT date was initially adjusted 
based solely on the fact that a request was submitted, not on the merits of the request.  During a 
subsequent review, it was detennincd that a waiver should not be granted and the member was so 
notified. 

5 .   Recommendation: 

a.  Recommend disapproval.  Disapproval will not result in a serious degradation of the 

rn ission . 

b.  If the application is approved, adjust the applicants HYTD to 1 August 2000, validate his 

re-cnlistment, and adjust his expiration of term of service (ETS) to 1 August 2000. 

c.  If the application is disapproved, no hrther action is required.  Member will be offcrcd the 

opportunity to apply for transfer to the Retired Reserve awaiting pay at age 60 and he will be authorized 
RTAP benefits. 

6.  If you have any questions, plcase contact SSgt St. Cyr, toll fiee 1-800-525-0102, extension 401, or 
e-mail : sstcyr@rpcmail .den .disa. mil. 

J